What caused the decline of interest for space and space fiction during the 2000s

[CmdrShepN7]

I remember back in the early 2010s articles like these were common place.

https://practicalfreespirit.com/2011/09/06/to-infinity-and-beyond/

https://www.impossiblepodcasts.com/2012/02/rayguns-and-rocket-ships-can-books-save.html?spref=tw

https://ricochet.com/226027/archives/the-death-of-the-space-opera/

https://www.sfsignal.com/archives/2012/06/mind-meld-has-space-opera-lost-its-luster/

https://gizmodo.com/why-we-need-more-space-adventures-5837047

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-space-future/is-humanity-quietly-abandoning-a-future-in-space-idUSBRE83G13Z20120417

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-28450386

Did Space Shuttle launches get boring? Did the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster, 9/11, and the 2008 financial crash put a damper on 90s optimism?

Was it the management of NASA during the 2000s?

Did materialism become more exciting for society as evidenced by the reality show boom?

Did the flood of sci fi during the 90s and 2000s cause vampires, superheroes, zombies, and medieval fantasy to feel new and refreshing compared to the space media of the 90s and 2000s?

There seems to have been a resurgence in interest for spaceflight, space exploration, and sci fi during the mid 2010s probably because of SpaceX.

And I find it sad that one person said that they saw a person on Twitter say that sci fi set in space felt anachronistic to them.

Did people in the early 2010s feel that human spaceflight and space sci fi were things that belong in the 60s or the 90s?

[Coastal Ron]

I remember back in the early 2010s articles like these were common place.
...

I was born in the 50's, grew up in the 60's & 70's, and have always been a fan of science fiction. Only one of the publications you listed do I read on a regular basis, but even then I wouldn't say that it represents the state of space and space fiction - that isn't what it's focus is.

Did Space Shuttle launches...

Was it the management of NASA...

Did materialism...

Did the flood of sci fi during the 90s and 2000s...

None of that matters regarding the production and consumption of science fiction.

There seems to have been a resurgence in interest for spaceflight, space exploration, and sci fi during the mid 2010s probably because of SpaceX.

SpaceX is not "science fiction", it represents science fact. Let's not confuse the two.

And I find it sad that one person said that they saw a person on Twitter say that sci fi set in space felt anachronistic to them.

Only one? Out of 7.753B people? Why are you concerned about what just one person said? 

Did people in the early 2010s feel that human spaceflight and space sci fi were things that belong in the 60s or the 90s?

First of all, there is ALWAYS an ebb and flow to just about everything, especially regarding the entertainment world, which includes fiction and science fiction.

I remember when Star Wars came out in 1977, and soon after there were LOTS of copycats. But then someone comes up with something original, like in 1979 when the movie Alien was released, or 1981 when Blade Runner came out. And btw, Blade Runner was not a popular movie when it was released, so sometimes it takes the passage of time to fully appreciate science fiction stories.

As to the 2010's, in October of 2010 the NASA Authorization Act of 2010 was passed in Congress and signed by President Obama, and I know that for me at least, I saw a potentially bright future specifically because the ISS was saved and the Commercial Crew program was to be created. However in 2010 it was still too early to know how things would work out with SpaceX, but through the decade they showed that they were worth watching.

And again, SpaceX does not represent science fiction. But in popular media, there was a LOT of great science fiction stories, including TV shows like Black Mirror, The Expanse, Humans, Man in the High Castle, to name a few, and with Man in the High Castle being a great example of older fiction being brought to life with modern framing.

So for me at least, I don't see the lack of interest for space and space fiction that you do. I was quite entertained during the 2010's... 

[Vahe231991]

I remember back in the early 2010s articles like these were common place.
...

I was born in the 50's, grew up in the 60's & 70's, and have always been a fan of science fiction. Only one of the publications you listed do I read on a regular basis, but even then I wouldn't say that it represents the state of space and space fiction - that isn't what it's focus is.

Did Space Shuttle launches...

Was it the management of NASA...

Did materialism...

Did the flood of sci fi during the 90s and 2000s...

None of that matters regarding the production and consumption of science fiction.

There seems to have been a resurgence in interest for spaceflight, space exploration, and sci fi during the mid 2010s probably because of SpaceX.

SpaceX is not "science fiction", it represents science fact. Let's not confuse the two.

And I find it sad that one person said that they saw a person on Twitter say that sci fi set in space felt anachronistic to them.

Only one? Out of 7.753B people? Why are you concerned about what just one person said? 

Did people in the early 2010s feel that human spaceflight and space sci fi were things that belong in the 60s or the 90s?

First of all, there is ALWAYS an ebb and flow to just about everything, especially regarding the entertainment world, which includes fiction and science fiction.

I remember when Star Wars came out in 1977, and soon after there were LOTS of copycats. But then someone comes up with something original, like in 1979 when the movie Alien was released, or 1981 when Blade Runner came out. And btw, Blade Runner was not a popular movie when it was released, so sometimes it takes the passage of time to fully appreciate science fiction stories.

As to the 2010's, in October of 2010 the NASA Authorization Act of 2010 was passed in Congress and signed by President Obama, and I know that for me at least, I saw a potentially bright future specifically because the ISS was saved and the Commercial Crew program was to be created. However in 2010 it was still too early to know how things would work out with SpaceX, but through the decade they showed that they were worth watching.

And again, SpaceX does not represent science fiction. But in popular media, there was a LOT of great science fiction stories, including TV shows like Black Mirror, The Expanse, Humans, Man in the High Castle, to name a few, and with Man in the High Castle being a great example of older fiction being brought to life with modern framing.

So for me at least, I don't see the lack of interest for space and space fiction that you do. I was quite entertained during the 2010's... 

Everyone knows that the dream of spaceflight being carried out by private individuals or entities without the need for budgetary help from NASA prior to the early 2000s existed only in the realm of science fiction, just as the notion of mankind flying faster than the sound barrier at the speed of Superman existed only in the popular imagination prior to the Cold War. However, Burt Rutan and Elon Musk get the credit as the fathers of private spaceflight because Musk knew that most American SLVs in service in the 1990s were based on Cold War missiles, and therefore wanted to create an all-new SLV using brand new technology.

[Nomadd]

SpaceX is not "science fiction", it represents science fact. Let's not confuse the two.

To be fair, SpaceX was science fiction.
 Until it wasn't.

[Twark_Main]

Did Space Shuttle launches...

Was it the management of NASA...

Did materialism...

Did the flood of sci fi during the 90s and 2000s...

None of that matters regarding the production and consumption of science fiction.

So reality doesn't influence fiction?

That's a very surprising claim.

There seems to have been a resurgence in interest for spaceflight, space exploration, and sci fi during the mid 2010s probably because of SpaceX.

SpaceX is not "science fiction", it represents science fact. Let's not confuse the two.

Nobody is confusing the two. We're just recognizing that reality and current events influence fiction. You're the only one who thinks this idea is controversial.

And I find it sad that one person said that they saw a person on Twitter say that sci fi set in space felt anachronistic to them.

Only one? Out of 7.753B people? Why are you concerned about what just one person said? 

This is the silliest "rebuttal" I've ever seen.

It's made even sillier by the fact that you go on to give your own personal experience. But why should we care? After all, you're just "one out of 7.97 billion people."



In future posts let's try to elevate the level of discourse to something above this base nitpicking, shall we? It's tremendously tedious.

[SpaceCadet1980]

And I find it sad that one person said that they saw a person on Twitter say that sci fi set in space felt anachronistic to them.

Only one? Out of 7.753B people? Why are you concerned about what just one person said? 

This is the silliest "rebuttal" I've ever seen.

It's made even sillier by the fact that you go on to give your own personal experience. But why should we care? After all, you're just "one out of 7.97 billion people."

In future posts let's try to elevate the level of discourse to something above this base nitpicking, shall we? It's tremendously tedious.

Nitpicking is something like pointing out when someone used out of date population statistics when the exact value doesn't change their point at all. I see nothing in the post you replied to that could be described as nitpicking. You could maybe call my sentence just now nitpicking, but unlike the minor error you corrected, pointing out that what you accused someone of is false is rather important to the conversation.

Also, Coastal Ron was pointing out that anecdotal evidence, especially of the type provided in this context is extremely weak, but using less boring words. This is not a silly at all, but rather standard part of a rational discussion. It is not hypocritical to counter a single piece of anecdotal evidence with another single piece of anecdotal evidence, since that is all you need to point out that the original anecdote is not universal.
 
Anyway, this seems to be the 3rd thread by the same poster making similar claims about trends in popular culture. While I don't really try to track such trends myself, it seems most people are in agreement that the claimed trends don't actually match with reality in any broad sense, but even if they do, it is just the normal cyclical nature of popular culture.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=54864
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=56520